On the value of the panentheistic analogy: A response to willem drees

Zygon

Volumn 35, Issue 3, 2000, Pages 699-704

  Clayton, Philip ^a  

^a SONOMA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

God and contemporary science; Naturalism; Panentheism; The mind body problem; Theological models; Willem drees

Indexed keywords

EID: 0346092069     PISSN: 05912385     EISSN: 14679744     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/0591-2385.00305     Document Type: Article

References (10)

1. Brown, Warren S., Nancey Murphy, and H. Newton Malony, eds. 1998. Whatever Happened totheSoul? Scientiβc and Theological Portraits of Human Nature. Minneapolis: Fortress.
2. Clayton, Philip. 1989. Explanation from Physics to Theology: An Essay in Rationality ana Religion. New Haven and London: Yale Univ. Press.
3. 1996. Das Gottesproblem. Gott und Unendlichkeit in der neuzeitlichen Philosophie. Paderborn: Ferdinand Schöningh Verlag.
4. 1998a. God and Contemporary Science. Edinburgh: Edinburgh Univ. Press, and Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans.
5. 1998b. "The Case for Christian Panentheism." Dialog 37 (Summer): 201-8.
6. 1999. "The Pantheistic Turn In Christian Theolog)-." Dialog 38 (Fall): 289-93.
7. 2000a. The Problem of God in Modern Thought. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans.
8. 2000b. "Neuroscience, the Person, and God: An Emergentist Account." Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science 35 (September): 613-52.
9. Polkinghorne, John. 1998. Belief in God in an Age of Science. New Haven: Yale Univ. Press.
10. Russell, Robert John, Nancey Murphy, Theo C. Meyering, and Michael Arbib, eds. 1999. Neuroscience and the Person: Scientific Perspectives on Divine Action. Vatican City State: Vatican Observatory Publications.